If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

I'd be more concerned with having to support thier rediculousley expensive pensions and health care. I'm just thankful I live in a Right To Work state, where unemployment is low and saleries competitve. Where people have the freedom to either join a union or not!

I hear ya, Franco. But you and I both know that in the not too distant future, there is going to be a retiree crisis, in terms of health care and sustenance.

We are living too long after retirement, and healthcare isn't going to the country doc for a bottle of penicillin anymore. Its being helicoptered to a mega-medical center for super-sub-specialists with cutting edge technology interventions that cost millions. If you work from 20 to 65, then live to 90....well, you know the math.

It really is more of a philosophical discussion than financial. If we have the money to build carrier groups and fire million dollar tomahawks like rubber bands.....we HAVE the money to care for our citizens. But do we want to?

Its a tough situation. I know conservatives don't want to see grandma and grandpa on steam grates. But to avoid that, we're going to have to divert some of our treasury to caring for people who can't care for themselves, for whatever reason. It used to be just deadbeats who fell on hard times. Now its people who have worked 20 or 30 years and have their pensions or funds yanked out from under them. And yes, those with piss poor planning.

I hear ya, Franco. But you and I both know that in the not too distant future, there is going to be a retiree crisis, in terms of health care and sustenance.

We are living too long after retirement, and healthcare isn't going to the country doc for a bottle of penicillin anymore. Its being helicoptered to a mega-medical center for super-sub-specialists with cutting edge technology interventions that cost millions. If you work from 20 to 65, then live to 90....well, you know the math.

It really is more of a philosophical discussion than financial. If we have the money to build carrier groups and fire million dollar tomahawks like rubber bands.....we HAVE the money to care for our citizens. But do we want to?

Its a tough situation. I know conservatives don't want to see grandma and grandpa on steam grates. But to avoid that, we're going to have to divert some of our treasury to caring for people who can't care for themselves, for whatever reason. It used to be just deadbeats who fell on hard times. Now its people who have worked 20 or 30 years and have their pensions or funds yanked out from under them. And yes, those with piss poor planning.

The problem is all the free-loaders that have been allowed into the system without having contributed a dime! Our Fed Gov has been a bumbling gaggle of nitwits letting everyone into the system, then raiding the system and borrowing money from it. There ought to be a lot of politicians in jail for their gross mismangement in government of public funds!

Our current dysfunctional Fed Gov now wants us to pay for the health cost of 35 million more when they can currently get excellent treatment at numerous charitable/university hospitals for free.

The problem is all the free-loaders that have been allowed into the system without having contributed a dime! Our Fed Gov has been a bumbling gaggle of nitwits letting everyone into the system, then raiding the system and borrowing money from it. There ought to be a lot of politicians in jail for their gross mismangement in government of public funds!

Amen, brother. And seeing those people on steam grates won't bother me so much. But there are those who were promised pensions, bennies, at a time when that was the norm....that have been caught in the transition. Many of them are greeters at walmart for their kibble. Those folks may have been duped, but they weren't freeloaders. Those are the ones that I'm troubled with.

He may be crazy but he's not exactly wrong...Without immigration we have negative population growth. So essentially we don't have enough people paying long enough to support the retirees. To say that abortion has no impact is a little ludicrious don't you think? there are almost 2 million abortions a year. That is quite a bit of money social security is losing.

This kind of thinking is what perpetuates the Social Security myth. Social Security is NOT a handout program. By the time a person reaches an age to draw Social Security, they have paid into Social Security more than they will ever draw, even if they live to be 100. But the crooked politicians have spent billions of Social Security dollars on other unnecessary crap, instead of leaving the money in the program to pay the benefits promised by the plan itself. TAKE THE CHECKBOOK AWAY FROM THE CONGRESS CRITTERS AND THE PRES.

"A government big enough to give you everything you want, is big enough to take away everything you have." - Thomas Jefferson

By the time a person reaches an age to draw Social Security, they have paid into Social Security more than they will ever draw, even if they live to be 100.

Better check your SSA statement you get every year. I look at my parents, especially my Mom, and know that they have received way more then she put in. Now maybe with a decent interest rate they are still withdrawing their money, but there is no way no how that my Mom has paid in the money that she has gotten since she was 62.

Better check your SSA statement you get every year. I look at my parents, especially my Mom, and know that they have received way more then she put in. Now maybe with a decent interest rate they are still withdrawing their money, but there is no way no how that my Mom has paid in the money that she has gotten since she was 62.

I have looked at my statement many times. I have paid in way more than I'll ever get back. Yes, there has been a great amount of fraud and abuse regarding Social Security, but the main problem with Social Security is the crooked politicians robbing Social Security to pay for ridiculous spending!!!!!

Last edited by Steve Hester; 03-31-2011 at 08:09 AM.

"A government big enough to give you everything you want, is big enough to take away everything you have." - Thomas Jefferson

Amen, brother. And seeing those people on steam grates won't bother me so much. But there are those who were promised pensions, bennies, at a time when that was the norm....that have been caught in the transition. Many of them are greeters at walmart for their kibble. Those folks may have been duped, but they weren't freeloaders. Those are the ones that I'm troubled with.

This is probably part of the problem. People seem to think they are entitled to retire at 62 or 65. That was never part of the american dream. At least I have n't read that any where. We live in some kind of enlightened generation.
I hope that if I live till 90 that I am able to get out of bed and go to work.
My father in law is 96 and goes to work 6 days a week at 6 in the morning.

If your company cans you at 62 then start a business you enjoy. After all a job that you enjoy is not considered work,,so they tell me. As far as I'm corncerned If you can't afford health care and it isn't life threatening then curl up in a corner and tough it out. even some of you republicans sound like you are entitled to be pampered.

This is probably part of the problem. People seem to think they are entitled to retire at 62 or 65. That was never part of the american dream. At least I have n't read that any where. We live in some kind of enlightened generation.
I hope that if I live till 90 that I am able to get out of bed and go to work.
My father in law is 96 and goes to work 6 days a week at 6 in the morning.

If your company cans you at 62 then start a business you enjoy. After all a job that you enjoy is not considered work,,so they tell me. As far as I'm corncerned If you can't afford health care and it isn't life threatening then curl up in a corner and tough it out. even some of you republicans sound like you are entitled to be pampered.

Pete.

I hear ya, and I hope on the the right side of the grass at that point, and still able to work.

That may be easier for doctors, lawyers, and businessmen to say. I worked several years in the oil refineries as a welder's helper and gopher, and can say definitively, that kind of work is not sustainable until 96! My grandfather put 43 years in the coal mines, and was good and ready to retire at 63. At 92, he's the only one of his work buddies still alive. I think letting someone retire at 65 after 40+ years of manual labor is within the bounds of reason.

I would argue just the opposite. If you do the research, I bet you'd discover that the demographics of those abortions would be more mouths for entitlement and SS to pay FOR, not be receiving revenues FROM.

But that is not to argue for or against abortion. Studies have shown across time and borders, that banning abortions results in an increase in violent and nonviolent crime 18-30 years down the road. The demographics of those having abortions overlaps the demographics of those committing crimes. The book Freakonomics discusses this at length with ample citations and documentation.

Haven't read the book but I'm puzzled. The left, which favors abortion rights would logically have more of them than the right.
And if there were less abortions there would be more liberals having babies, with majority of those likely growing to be little liberals, logically leading to more government entitlement programs/usage/costs since the left believes in them more than the right

So - How can more liberals & more govt/social programs lead to an increase in crime?
If so, isn't that more proof that they need to be cut as soon as possible?

"It's not that government is inherently stupid, although that's a debatable question."
Rand Paul CPAC speech 2011

I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it. Thomas Jefferson to Archibald Stuart, 1791
________________________________________
Proud partner of (HR) WR SR Brian's 44Magnum Monster
co-owned by HR Rianne's 2nd Chance Hurricane Rebel

Haven't read the book but I'm puzzled. The left, which favors abortion rights would logically have more of them than the right.
And if there were less abortions there would be more liberals having babies, with majority of those likely growing to be little liberals, logically leading to more government entitlement programs/usage/costs since the left believes in them more than the right

So - How can more liberals & more govt/social programs lead to an increase in crime?
If so, isn't that more proof that they need to be cut as soon as possible?

The authors of Freakonomics simply says that the drop in crime rate is correlated with an increase in abortions. This is due to the fact that poor people tend to have more abortions since they cannot afford the baby in the first place especially since social programs are being eliminated for having more babies. Poor and desperate people tend to commit more crimes so if you have less poor and desperate people there tends to be less crime.

I don't know about the correlation between government social programs and crime.

(Edited, the original statement said "the drop in crime rate is correlated with a drop in abortions.")

Last edited by LokiMeister; 03-31-2011 at 05:33 PM.
Reason: Replacing drop with increase as it should be.